• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

The Weighted Peak Method in the Time Domain Compared With Alternative Methods for Assessing LF Electric and Magnetic Fields.

作者信息

Keller Helmut

机构信息

*Narda Safety Test Solutions GmbH, Pfullingen, Germany.

出版信息

Health Phys. 2017 Jul;113(1):54-65. doi: 10.1097/HP.0000000000000667.

DOI:10.1097/HP.0000000000000667
PMID:28542011
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5515633/
Abstract

Directive 2013/35/EU of the European Parliament and Council recommends the weighted peak method for assessing non-thermal effects of low frequency (LF) electric and magnetic fields. This article shows that this method is very practical and user friendly and is absolutely reliable to lead to correct results when applied in the time domain. The method can be used without limitations for any field profile and emulates the underlying physical and biological effects significantly better than all other presently known methods. For this reason, this method is described and recommended in many technical standards for assessing the non-thermal effects of electromagnetic fields and is recognized by the international scientific community. The disadvantages of competing methods are demonstrated. Some technical aspects of real measurement systems are also examined.

摘要
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/e371/5515633/a8fa3cf8e79e/hp-113-54-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/e371/5515633/75662d686f0a/hp-113-54-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/e371/5515633/7338058c2932/hp-113-54-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/e371/5515633/a8fa3cf8e79e/hp-113-54-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/e371/5515633/75662d686f0a/hp-113-54-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/e371/5515633/7338058c2932/hp-113-54-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/e371/5515633/a8fa3cf8e79e/hp-113-54-g003.jpg

相似文献

1
The Weighted Peak Method in the Time Domain Compared With Alternative Methods for Assessing LF Electric and Magnetic Fields.
Health Phys. 2017 Jul;113(1):54-65. doi: 10.1097/HP.0000000000000667.
2
Inconsistency of a recently proposed method for assessing magnetic field exposure for protection against peripheral nerve stimulation in occupational situations.
J Radiol Prot. 2016 Dec;36(4):N77-N88. doi: 10.1088/0952-4746/36/4/N77. Epub 2016 Nov 28.
3
An analysis of differences in the low-frequency electric and magnetic field exposure standards of ices and ICNIRP.ICES与国际非电离辐射防护委员会(ICNIRP)低频电场和磁场暴露标准差异分析。
Health Phys. 2005 Jul;89(1):71-80. doi: 10.1097/01.hp.0000156958.44580.f0.
4
Further Developments in Beta-Gamma to Alpha Ratios.
Health Phys. 2017 Apr;112(4):409-413. doi: 10.1097/HP.0000000000000652.
5
Static fields: biological effects and mechanisms relevant to exposure limits.静态场:与暴露限值相关的生物学效应和机制
Health Phys. 2007 Jun;92(6):584-90. doi: 10.1097/01.HP.0000232776.94463.c4.
6
Benchmark of different assessment methods for non-sinusoidal magnetic field exposure in the context of European Directive 2013/35/EU.
J Radiol Prot. 2019 Apr;39(2):455-469. doi: 10.1088/1361-6498/ab0988. Epub 2019 Feb 22.
7
Numerical dosimetry ELF: accuracy of the method, variability of models and parameters, and the implication for quantifying guidelines.极低频电磁场的数值剂量学:方法的准确性、模型和参数的变异性以及对量化指南的影响
Health Phys. 2007 Jun;92(6):521-30. doi: 10.1097/01.HP.0000251249.00507.ca.
8
Aspects of harmonisation of individual monitoring for external radiation in Europe: conclusions of a EURADOS action.欧洲个人外照射辐射监测的协调方面:欧洲辐射剂量学与防护协会行动的结论
Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2006;118(2):139-43. doi: 10.1093/rpd/ncl006. Epub 2006 Mar 31.
9
A comparison of important international and national standards for limiting exposure to EMF including the scientific rationale.对包括科学依据在内的限制电磁场暴露的重要国际和国家标准的比较。
Health Phys. 2007 Jun;92(6):635-41. doi: 10.1097/01.HP.0000248111.57701.27.
10
Requirements for reliable worst-case assessment of human exposure to RF electromagnetic fields with known uncertainty.对已知不确定性的人类暴露于射频电磁场的可靠最坏情况评估的要求。
Health Phys. 2007 Jun;92(6):554-64. doi: 10.1097/01.HP.0000265219.86389.cf.

本文引用的文献

1
Inconsistency of a recently proposed method for assessing magnetic field exposure for protection against peripheral nerve stimulation in occupational situations.
J Radiol Prot. 2016 Dec;36(4):N77-N88. doi: 10.1088/0952-4746/36/4/N77. Epub 2016 Nov 28.
2
Guidelines for limiting exposure to time-varying electric and magnetic fields (1 Hz to 100 kHz).限制暴露于时变电场和磁场(1赫兹至100千赫兹)的指南。
Health Phys. 2010 Dec;99(6):818-36. doi: 10.1097/HP.0b013e3181f06c86.
3
Assessment of non-sinusoidal, pulsed, or intermittent exposure to low frequency electric and magnetic fields.对低频电场和磁场的非正弦、脉冲式或间歇性暴露的评估。
Health Phys. 2007 Jun;92(6):541-6. doi: 10.1097/01.HP.0000262628.29600.b4.
4
Guidance on determining compliance of exposure to pulsed and complex non-sinusoidal waveforms below 100 kHz with ICNIRP guidelines.关于确定低于100kHz的脉冲和复杂非正弦波形暴露是否符合国际非电离辐射防护委员会(ICNIRP)指南的指导意见。
Health Phys. 2003 Mar;84(3):383-7. doi: 10.1097/00004032-200303000-00016.